Different ontologies: land change science and health research

Abstract

Land use and land cover (LULC) is now recognized as an important driver of disease. For emerging or re-emerging infectious diseases, LULC offers context and serves as a likely proximate driver of risk particularly when considering vector-borne or zoonotic diseases. Ontological differences embedded within disciplinary structures impede progress limiting the ultimate potential of both LULC data and land change theory within disease research. Geography, space, and time serve as effective complements to traditional health and place organizational and disease-research strategies. Improved systemic clarity is obtained if one orients the disease relationship to particular contexts and if the scales of the relationships are clearly defined.

Figure 1

The epidemiological triangle model of disease causation.

Figure 2

LULC models are best used in ecologic scale study designs. Although potentially appropriate, there are far fewer good applications of LULC models in case series, cross-sectional, or case control applications. We believe that the near term potential for the expansion of LULC and health research is within cross-sectional designs.